qengho writes "Vstone's programmable and automonous humanoid robot Robovie-M can play soccer, throw a ball both over- and underhand, and even demonstrate shame (over a missed shot, presumably). Lots of QuickTime movies of the bot in action."
There's a big difference between demonstrating shame and feeling shame. It's a pretty paltry feature compared to the ability to automate its motions so well. I wonder how well it'll do in the RoboCup?
I'm impressed by this
by
SimianOverlord
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
This little guy shows that as far as the goal of a fully working robotic (human-avatar) intelligence, mechanistically we're there. We can create an avatar which is robust enough to do the full human movements. Now we just need to improve the AI side of things. Let's face it, AI is severly lacking at the moment. I wouldn't say I'm an expert by any means, but I do try to keep up with the relevant research in the field.
Most experts agree the real test of artificial intelligence is, of course, found in game theory, with chess programs in particular gaining a lot of attention and publicity because of their year on year increase in performance thanks to better and better AI. But these certainly aren't quite up to scratch - a good example is a game I played just 10 minutes ago against the computer at so-called "Intermediate II" level.
I find most computer chess programs good at opening moves, because most have built in opening move databases (which I regard as cheating). I played the two knights defense as always, leading with 1....d4. The computer answered with its own two knights defense which is particularly annoying and insipid. That's one mark down for AI, mimicking human behaviour.
The trouble is chess AI is reactive rather than proactive and so whereas I was working to take down the right flank of the computers defence using a Queen bishop rook combo, it was just skirmishing around the centre to take a few pawns off me. Very poor AI.
Frankly, it's stategic thinking that the computer can't match us at, which was clear by move 27, where my move 27...KnC3-E4 forked a queen and rook. That sort of manouvering is quite obvious to the human intellect, and the advantage in points meant I went on to win the game quite comfortably again, with a rook v bishop endgame and quick checkmate.
Really all this just goes to illustrate that AI has a long way to go...I wouldn't say I was much more than a very good chess player.
-- Meine Schwester ist sehr, sehr reizvoll - Nietzsche
Re:I'm impressed by this
by
Deusy
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
This little guy shows that as far as the goal of a fully working robotic (human-avatar) intelligence, mechanistically we're there. We can create an avatar which is robust enough to do the full human movements. Now we just need to improve the AI side of things. Let's face it, AI is severly lacking at the moment. I wouldn't say I'm an expert by any means, but I do try to keep up with the relevant research in the field.
Ruh-eally. Did you watch the movies?
The robots had the dexterity and balance of, at best, a 3 year old human. The over hand throw video was telling, as it took the robot several separate motions to position itself and wobbled about as much as is possible without falling over upon throwing the ball. The ball was thrown with no accuracy.
If anything, this actually shows how far we have yet to go before welcoming our robot overlords.
Re:I'm impressed by this
by
RichardX
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
No offence, but unless you happen to be Kasparov, I'd suggest you should look for a better chess program before denoucing AI systems in general as being poor at chess.
Chess is a game very well suited to computers, and thus one that AI systems have rapidly become good at. If you want to see something AI really struggles with, take a look at the game of Go - as yet noone's come close to creating a Deep Blue of Go, as it's far more abstract and 'human' in it's mechanics than chess.
-- Curiosity was framed. Ignorance killed the cat.
OK, but what about the hooligans ?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
are they called "soccer hooligans" or "football hooligans" ?
Re:Ignorant mods
by
Cruciform
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Slashdot doesn't need anti-americanism.
US foreign policy does a fine job of that itself:P
If someone says soccer, you know what it is. If someone says football, you have to find out which of the several different sports they are referring to.
Americans may not like soccer, but at least they have a better less-confusing name for it.
I agree with you. In one sport, a spherical object (a ball) is mainly propelled by the feet of the players.
In the other sport, a pointy object that isn't even oval shaped (called by some a ball, but that's pushing the definition of ball way too much) is only occasionally kicked, and is almost always carried or thrown by the players' arms.
Obviously, if one of these sports is to be called football, it's the first one (and most of the world does just that).
The other one could be called "American Rugby" since it certainly resembles the sport played in most other former British colonies.
Asimo doesn't have boards for hands and feet
by
puargsss
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
You'll notice Asimo was designed to look and act like a human, while this soccer robot was designed to 1) identify ball, and 2) move ball to goal. Asimo is supposed to interact with humans and have more autonomous thinking than just moving a ball around. Not to mention the surface area of those feet and hands looks to be about 300% comparitively by size with the Asimo.
Slashdot Mirror
"even demonstrate shame"
There's a big difference between demonstrating shame and feeling shame. It's a pretty paltry feature compared to the ability to automate its motions so well. I wonder how well it'll do in the RoboCup?
This little guy shows that as far as the goal of a fully working robotic (human-avatar) intelligence, mechanistically we're there. We can create an avatar which is robust enough to do the full human movements. Now we just need to improve the AI side of things. Let's face it, AI is severly lacking at the moment. I wouldn't say I'm an expert by any means, but I do try to keep up with the relevant research in the field.
Most experts agree the real test of artificial intelligence is, of course, found in game theory, with chess programs in particular gaining a lot of attention and publicity because of their year on year increase in performance thanks to better and better AI. But these certainly aren't quite up to scratch - a good example is a game I played just 10 minutes ago against the computer at so-called "Intermediate II" level.
I find most computer chess programs good at opening moves, because most have built in opening move databases (which I regard as cheating). I played the two knights defense as always, leading with 1....d4. The computer answered with its own two knights defense which is particularly annoying and insipid. That's one mark down for AI, mimicking human behaviour.
The trouble is chess AI is reactive rather than proactive and so whereas I was working to take down the right flank of the computers defence using a Queen bishop rook combo, it was just skirmishing around the centre to take a few pawns off me. Very poor AI.
Frankly, it's stategic thinking that the computer can't match us at, which was clear by move 27, where my move 27...KnC3-E4 forked a queen and rook. That sort of manouvering is quite obvious to the human intellect, and the advantage in points meant I went on to win the game quite comfortably again, with a rook v bishop endgame and quick checkmate.
Really all this just goes to illustrate that AI has a long way to go...I wouldn't say I was much more than a very good chess player.
Meine Schwester ist sehr, sehr reizvoll - Nietzsche
are they called "soccer hooligans" or "football hooligans" ?
Slashdot doesn't need anti-americanism.
:P
US foreign policy does a fine job of that itself
If someone says soccer, you know what it is. If someone says football, you have to find out which of the several different sports they are referring to.
Americans may not like soccer, but at least they have a better less-confusing name for it.
In the other sport, a pointy object that isn't even oval shaped (called by some a ball, but that's pushing the definition of ball way too much) is only occasionally kicked, and is almost always carried or thrown by the players' arms.
Obviously, if one of these sports is to be called football, it's the first one (and most of the world does just that).
The other one could be called "American Rugby" since it certainly resembles the sport played in most other former British colonies.
You'll notice Asimo was designed to look and act like a human, while this soccer robot was designed to 1) identify ball, and 2) move ball to goal. Asimo is supposed to interact with humans and have more autonomous thinking than just moving a ball around. Not to mention the surface area of those feet and hands looks to be about 300% comparitively by size with the Asimo.